Attracting like-minded lovers

hotspring's picture
Submitted by hotspring on
Printer-friendly version

Since I've been experimenting with withholding of orgasm, I seem to be attracting a number of men who are also interested in exploring this form of lovemaking.

I had a great time last night with a new lover. We both came, but it was all very relaxing because this was not at all our goal and we had about three different sessions of sex in which we stayed on the edge of orgasm for a number of hours. I've never experienced this before the first time being with someone. So I guess the real question, as sood pointed out, is when to stop. If you push the envelope again and again you're bound to have an orgasm. All in all we were really in tune and comfortable with one another. Stating out loud beforehand that it was not necessary for either of us to have an orgasm redireceted the focus to pure enjoyment of the moment.

I probably won't sleep with this guy again eventhough we are sexually compatible and interested in exploring nonorgasmic sex. I find condoms to limit electricity flow and so friction and greater spped is usually used to compensate for the diminished electrical exchange. I find the most emotionally close lovemaking can be very gentle slow movements and deep breathing. It is also this kind of lovemaking that I am most physically responsive to. Using a condom diminishes the ability to do this (with some people more than others, maybe with this guy more than others).

So, I really think that the practice of these ancient techniques is more suited to a committed partnership.

Nevertheless, it was a fun night, very nourishing.


Sounds like the Holy Grail

I must say, I do wonder why you "probably won't sleep with this guy again" after you "stayed on the edge of orgasm" with him "for a number of hours". I know condoms aren't much fun to use; but you seem to have managed okay.

I've always imagined men who were interested in exploring nonorgasmic sex must be few and far between; but maybe not in your neck of the woods.

Thinking about it, I never talk to anyone about sex, apart from my wife, so how would I know what goes on? I even belong to a men's group, where we sit around discussing subjects dear to our hearts, and nobody's brought up sex yet, although I'm sure it must be on everyone's mind.

not the holy grail

As much fun as I had with this guy, I don't consider it the holy grail because I find faster sex to be less emotionally close than slow tender sex, which seems to bring my deepest essence forward. Using a condom still allowed for physically gratifying sex, but we weren't able to slow down enough to fully relax into eachother. From a physiological angle, this is because he could not stay as hard going slow with the condom on (this guy was very well hung, and I've noticed men who are larger oftentimes are not as hard). So maybe the issue was less about the condom than his physiology. He said he can stay harder going slower when there's no condom.

In any case, emotional intimacy and closeness are things that deveop over time, and not something I expect from a one night stand. But strangely, I've found that some of my most passionate sexual relationships have been ones in which there is an odd lack of an everyday, basic chemistry. This seems strange to me, because in general one would think that close everyday encounters and their quality would positively affect the chemistry in bed. With my last partner, it was like my starvation for emotional availability made the sex that much better, because during sex he was finally present and open, and the contrast between this and our everyday boredom was thrilling.

The reason I probably won't sleep with this guy again has less to do with the quality of the sex than it does with where him and I are in our lives and how interesting he is to me as a potential partner. He seems to be a sort of bachelor type who has a hard time commiting to a woman. So, while I have no feelings of posessiveness towards him, I know that ultimately I am looking for more than just a lover.

Him and I decided not to have sex for a month but instead to play tantric games with eachother - just have an evening of dancing, or making out, or feeding eachother's senses in other ways.

While I'm excited about this idea, I also find that it is the ambiguity of a situation (not sure if you're going to get it or not) that causes a lot of excitement. Once you've ruled out the possibility of getting laid, such excercises lose some spark. It would be nice to be able to be both intentional and ambiguous at once.

Fair enough

It's interesting you should say that with your previous partner "during sex he was finally present and open". I find I am definitely more present and open during sex than at other times. However, in many ways, the converse is true of my wife.

I remember reading years ago a book about relationships which suggested there is usually a pursuer in a partnership, who desires more and closer intimacy, and a pursued, who runs away from that prospect. At the time, I pictured myself as the pursued, with my wife as the pursuer. However, the book went on to explain how, if the pursued turned and gave more of him or herself, the pursuer, who actually didn't want to 'catch' what he or she was chasing, became frightened and ran away, in a reversal of roles.

I've certainly noticed how, when I have periods of increased openness, during sex or, more rarely, during everyday life, my wife has a tendency to clam up. It's as if we complement each other with our differences, and when one of us changes habits, the other changes, too.

humans are strange creatures

I know women can be as emotionally distant as men at times.

I realize the above post in which I mention my boyfriend being distant might be a projection, since I'm usually pretty analytical, which is why physical activity is such a good balance for me and so nourishing when I do it (this holds for exercise as much as sex). Maybe he was waiting for ME to be tender. In any case, we didn't really naturally bring this tenderness out in eachother. Him and I are both pretty squeamish around commitment, and feeling like there might be something better out there is kindov the antithesis of tender presence.

My reasons for being noncommital have to do with a basic fear of being vulnerable to a man. I would truly love to find someone I was comfortable enought to be this vulnerable with. Having a child and being financially dependent on someone is very scary to me. I wouldn't want to do it with just anyone. But it seems my basic mistrust that I could find someone who could be a good father and provider is affecting who I meet. I often feel surrounded by people who are in their mid to late thirties, have had endless relationships, some healthy, some not, have never committed, have not had kids, and whose lives consist mostly of partying and doing drugs. Everyone wants their own freedom. Intimacy and attachment are seen as the antithesis of freedom, so many people settle for hot sex.

I guess what I was saying in the first post of this thread is that I want hot sex, but I want a lot more than that, and since I am pretty in tune with my body, able to communicate directly what I like, and am around a lot of sexually experienced people, hot sex is not that hard to come by. It's not particularly extraordinary. By hot sex I mean: your genitals are on fire, you're comfortable you can get eachother off, and you both think the other person is physically hot.

It's a nice start tho, I guess. But sometimes I feel I jump in so quickly, and the sex is so good, that it is easy to just be content with a certain mechanical level of competency as a couple, without the real guts to go any deeper.

Since I hadn't been laid in a few months, I'm happy for hot sex. But it's not the be all and end all. There must be more to the sexual connection and the potential there for evolution of consciousness. Right now, most of my peers seem to think being evolved sexually means being okay with porn as a natural fact of life, being as noncommital and nonposessive as possible (cool as a cucumber), and having a wide range of partners/experiences/techniques/sexual traditions to draw from.

How many people are really pushing the edges of vulnerability? And what does it really mean to be vulnerable? How do I trust? How do I open? And still remain discriminate?

False assumption

I think I was assuming on your behalf an intimacy I would expect to be present when making love the way you described but that would have depended on other factors being there too that perhaps weren't.

As soon as you mentioned kids and finances and trust I remembered how much more is involved in a relationship than sex.

Vulnerability is complex. I find I'm often more open to strangers I meet and know I will never see again than to anyone I care about. I don't think this is because of a lack of trust so much as a desire to maintain an image of myself as close as possible to the way I imagine they think I am.

In the simplest way, if I'm afraid, but my wife believes I'm strong, I think it's better to pretend I am strong than to admit my fear.

Maybe it isn't, though.

many levels of intimacy

As I study massage, I learn more and more how many levels of intimacy there are and how many subtle forms of communication can exist between people. It's not that causual sex is not at all intimate. It is intimate. As you point out, it can be more intimate in the sense that this person does not fully know you and so it may be more possible to experience new levels of openness that might be harder to access in a relationship where each person has established an idea of who the other is, and is dependent on some sort of continuity in behavior for a sense of security.

I don't feel that the sex I had the other night was closed off. It had its own quality of vulnerability, and it is still a beautiful vulnerability. Perhaps it's particularly poignant, because there is no knowledge that the other person will respect it, or that there is enough continuity in the relationship to fully relish it. Still, the level of vulnerability in a casual sex encounter is not particularly subtle, perhaps not because it can't be, but because both people don't usually allow it to be, since they don't fully know eachother and may be trying to project a certain image.

From practicing meditation and from doing bodywork, I am learning that it is the less obvious and more subtle levels of energy (in this case, intimacy), that are the most touching and most profound. So, while casual sex is still intimate, it rarely reaches very subtle levels of attunement and communication.

Nor should it necessarily. It's just a matter of intention. Where do I want to go with my sexuality, how to I want to explore and share it? If my intention is to share my sexuality as part of a spiritual practice through development of very subtle awareness (which can take time to develop), then having a committed partner also on a spiritual path is more likely to be conducive to this.

Though I hate to imply that anything is any more spiritually valuable than anything else. The gross levels are as valuable as the subtle, but they do not take as much skill, silence, listening, and patience to cultivate.

I would like to cultivate and maintain a garden of earthly delights with another, and also awaken to any ugly weeds or sorrowful blossoms that may poke up from the soil of vulnerability.

It's easy to think of maintenance as something boring, like brushing one's teeth. But it could also be seen as devotion. I maintain a practice of respect, alertness, gentless, openness with a partner as part of devotion. This devotion must be continually renewed. I long to be devoted not just to another person, but also to my community and to the earth. Without devotion, we are just lost souls.

Maybe my problem is that I want to know I am safe in being vulnerable, and that this vulnerability will be honored and cherished, not seen as a weakness or taken advantage of. This is not mere caution. The fear of being vulnerable as a woman comes from a very real cellular memory of this vulnerability being fully abused by men for thousands of years. Tho then we come into the topic of selective memory. Why do I focus on this fact? Why don't I imagine all of the lovers of past ages, all of the men who were loving and tender to their women despite the insanity of the cultures they grew up in?

Is it a contradiction to need all the right secure conditions before letting oneself feel vulnerable? Maybe it is.

The greater the vulnerability, the greater the openness and receptivity, the greater the danger of letting love take over the whole course of our lives. As a woman, if I am willing to be completely vulnerable and open, this will literally lead to me becoming totally taken over physically in the form of another being growing inside me. What terrifies me is also what thrills me and what I hope to be able to fully embody someday. In the meantime I hope to be very intentional around birth control and explicit with any souls waiting around that I am not ready to welcome them into my body.

After this long thread I still don't know what vulnerability is or isn't, but I do know that I want my own spiritual path and the further fine-tuning of very subtle levels of awareness to be an integral part of my sexuality, and ideally of anyone I am having sex with.

Actually, this new lover does seem to have many of these characteristics and similar interests. In any case, he is a friend on the path no matter where it leads, and I can learn much just from this process.


I do hope you find someone special to share your journey with. You certainly deserve to.

I realise we're all on different quests. Mine is not knowingly spiritual, and I'm not deliberately after increased vulnerability. What I want is greater eroticism in my life, by which I don't mean more sex so much as a different approach to the sex I already have. I'm confident this process, if adhered to, will lead to greater intimacy; but that's not my primary goal (or maybe it is, and I'm just not consciously aware of it).